Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-27 Thread Steve Langasek
tags 429429 pending thanks On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 10:19:22AM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Andrew Bartlett wrote: As a team, we support the use of Samba as an NFS replacement. This is an explicit design goal of the CIFS unix extensions. So, in a unix-only environment, is it a perfectly

Bug#429429: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-20 Thread Christian Perrier
That's fair; I'd be happy to make a change like that, but letting users disable nmbd when the system isn't specifically configured for an AD-only environment sounds broken to me. Hmm, well, there would be several uses of this and why not leave the choice to our users anyway. I'd vote for

Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-19 Thread Andrew Bartlett
On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 12:55 -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Steve Langasek wrote: On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 08:19:43PM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Package: samba Version: 3.0.24-6etch4 Severity: wishlist nmbd is not always necessary; for instance in a non-Windows environment with

Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-19 Thread Robert Edmonds
Andrew Bartlett wrote: As a team, we support the use of Samba as an NFS replacement. This is an explicit design goal of the CIFS unix extensions. So, in a unix-only environment, is it a perfectly acceptable use case to run without nmbd if browsing is not required and name resolution is

Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-18 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 08:19:43PM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Package: samba Version: 3.0.24-6etch4 Severity: wishlist nmbd is not always necessary; for instance in a non-Windows environment with working name resolution. It would be nice if the samba init script supported only starting

Bug#429429: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-18 Thread Gerald (Jerry) Carter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Langasek wrote: On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 08:19:43PM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Package: samba Version: 3.0.24-6etch4 Severity: wishlist nmbd is not always necessary; for instance in a non-Windows environment with working name

Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-18 Thread Robert Edmonds
Steve Langasek wrote: On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 08:19:43PM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Package: samba Version: 3.0.24-6etch4 Severity: wishlist nmbd is not always necessary; for instance in a non-Windows environment with working name resolution. It would be nice if the samba init

Bug#429429: [Pkg-samba-maint] Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-18 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 08:12:56AM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote: Steve Langasek wrote: On Sun, Jun 17, 2007 at 08:19:43PM -0400, Robert Edmonds wrote: Package: samba Version: 3.0.24-6etch4 Severity: wishlist nmbd is not always necessary; for instance in a non-Windows environment

Bug#429429: samba: nmbd not always necessary

2007-06-17 Thread Robert Edmonds
Package: samba Version: 3.0.24-6etch4 Severity: wishlist nmbd is not always necessary; for instance in a non-Windows environment with working name resolution. It would be nice if the samba init script supported only starting the smbd daemon. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0